Unless this user has never used a device running something other than iOS, they've already dealt with this.
But this concern requires a few things to be true:
- An alternative app store is created that does not employ any form of restriction to protect users from this
- Legitimate apps that an end user needs see value in publishing themselves on this alternative app store
- There is a critical mass of users that prefer the alternative app store, such that the legitimate app publisher no longer sees value in publishing to Apple's app store
- As a result, those users who would have preferred the privacy and safety that Apple provides are now forced to use the new app store
This is a possible doomsday scenario, but it's not clear to me that enforcing and protecting a market in which Apple is effectively guaranteed a profit on everyone else's apps is the right solution? If this were to happen, perhaps we address those apps through direct legislation that targets user privacy, akin to what the EU has started to move on? Or a solution similar to this.
I think you may be missing part of what the GP is saying: the concern isn't (primarily) that an alternative App Store will overall become more popular than Apple's. It's that specific apps like Facebook will create their own App Stores whose primary purpose is to distribute their one or small number of apps without the restrictions Apple places on privacy.
So the Facebook app (and Instagram, WhatsApp, and whatever else Facebook owns these days) would be able to collect as much data as the OS itself allows, without any kind of warnings before install.
It could potentially even use private APIs of some sort to bypass Apple's OS-level permissions dialogs and collect data without even asking the user first—it's unclear, at this point, to what extent Apple would be able to police this sort of behavior from motivated bad actors like Facebook when they're not being distributed through Apple's App Store.
iOS is sandboxed so they can’t do anything outside of the context of that app. To use any APIs that would require a permission dialogue you have to make a request to get a handle on them which only happens after a user grants permission, you can’t just reach into these. This is baked into the OS. Apps like the ones you’re talking about already hoover up is much data as possible in this context.
iOS itself is actually really good at this and can be improved and hardened further, Apple wants you to believe it’s somehow their review process and strict distribution channel that makes this possible.
Sandboxing insufficiently addresses this problem as permissions can be granted by the user for legitimate purposes and then once granted they could be abused to violate user privacy.
Yeah I understood that part. My argument is that Facebook would likely lose a lot of users if they forced all users to download Facebook via their App Store. There is still an incentive for them to use Apple’s.
But beside that point, Facebook has been able to force side loading on Android for years and still distributes via the Play Store, so that’s probably at least some evidence that they believe that distribution channel to be worthwhile.
> Unless this user has never used a device running something other than iOS, they've already dealt with this
Right, and they hate it. There's a reason why the iPhone and App Store were such a massive hit. People will choose convenience and security over freedom most of the time.
I hesitate to respond because the idea that Apple is a 3T marketing firm is moronic
Let’s not pretend Apple isn’t building the best consumer silicon in the world and the most secure and user-friendly consumer operating systems in the world. That’s not even considering their supply chain innovations.
Apple devices are superior to their competition in just about every objective measure.
Apple gained popularity long, long before they started developing their own silicon. Sure, they're doing nice things with their vast fortunes, but let's not pretend that's why they're perceived as a luxury product. It's all in the marketing.
You might want to let Jonny Ive know his design org never made a difference lol
Apple was in shambles before the iPod/iPhone. You think the iPhone succeeded because of marketing? You don’t think the fact that they made multi-touch displays easy to use was relevant to their success?
Apple products are so desired that people get resentful when they can’t afford them. Then they post moronic takes on HN from their Samsungs
Let’s be real most people don’t give a shit (unless they’re into emulators apparently), this is really about companies trying to slice up the pie between them.
But this concern requires a few things to be true:
- An alternative app store is created that does not employ any form of restriction to protect users from this
- Legitimate apps that an end user needs see value in publishing themselves on this alternative app store
- There is a critical mass of users that prefer the alternative app store, such that the legitimate app publisher no longer sees value in publishing to Apple's app store
- As a result, those users who would have preferred the privacy and safety that Apple provides are now forced to use the new app store
This is a possible doomsday scenario, but it's not clear to me that enforcing and protecting a market in which Apple is effectively guaranteed a profit on everyone else's apps is the right solution? If this were to happen, perhaps we address those apps through direct legislation that targets user privacy, akin to what the EU has started to move on? Or a solution similar to this.